Rays' respond to traffic and parking concerns

As expected, the Rays have transmitted a response to the city's parking and traffic concerns. In short:

• The Rays consultant continues to feel it is not necessary to construct a 3,500-space parking garage.
• And the team got two new letters of interest from private companies that the Rays say could generate an additional 4,000-to-5,000 parking spaces for baseball.
• In particular, the downtown Hilton said it would "seriously consider" building a multi-story parking garage at its facility if the Rays' plans are approved.

Read the report for yourself here (There's much discussion about how far people are willing to walk to the game).

Comments

[Rick K]

Aaron, thanks for yet another excellent update. You rock!

[Rick K]

Both the City's report, and the report of the City's independent parking analyst concluded that "the Phase I report prepared by RK&K (hired by the Rays, at the team's expense) was well prepared and extremely thorough, and that providing information with this level of detail at such an early stage in the process was commendable."

So, who are we to believe?

The experts hired by the City?

The professinals on City staff?

Or the spinmiesters who are determined to defeat these proposals no matter how many lies they have to tell?

[Ray F]

Aaron,

Likewise, great addition. I think this shows that the Rays are seriously addressing every issue brought up and shows a genuine concern for keeping the Rays in St Pete. Now it's up to us, as residents to vote yes. They are giving us everything we ask for.

It would not be a valid argument to expect the team to pay for the stadium without public funding. No other team will pay for their own stadium based on the fact that all they have to do is toss the relocate bait out and let another city take it.

Call it scare tactics, call it threats. I call it closing a location and opening another.

[Rays report proves how pigs can actually fly]

You can quote any parking study you want, the people of St. Pete aren't stupid and WE AREN'T going to approve this stadium plan.

I'm willing to put money on it, any takers?

I'll bet $1000 for starters, who's in?

[Ray F]

but, isn't the parking revenues one of the main issues that is keeping people from wanting to vote on the issue?

take the waterfront out of the equation and the same people would be crying the same garbage about different "answers" they need to approve.

[Thomas]

"They are giving us everything we ask for."

Actually, I dont see anything in there about how they're going to get the $50M or so required for construction.

The Rays still haven't produced a Lease Term Sheet.

"all they have to do is toss the relocate bait out"

It would help if they had a viable relocatoin option. It would also help if they didn't have a lease that runs through 2027.

"It would not be a valid argument to expect the team to pay for the stadium without public funding."

It alos would not be a valid argument to have the Rays contribution be a mere $150M over 30 years.

Ray F, you're just more easily satisfied than most.

The team needs to step up.

[PS]

This is great news. Private parking lot operators will make their lots available to the game attendees!

Will they donate their proceeds to build the stadium?

[PSS :)]

Maybe they can donate their lots to build the stadium on too!

[Rays Mike]

Wasn't the parking component of the original proposal that the Rays are going to prepay for those private parking spots? It's a win-win for all - the private lots get a sellout every night, and there is more inventory for the Rays to buy = more money towards the constuction costs.

BTW: Is it physically impossible for one side or the other to admit that any points against their position might actually be valid, and not just dismissed as spin or lies???

[Physically Impossible, Yes]

Rays Mic,

I don't want that huge stadium on the waterfront.

I won't hear any arguments otherwise, they matter ZERO to me.

If they choose another location, then I'll consider their arguments.

[Ray F]

hahahahahaha...

I agree with the opposition in thinking the deal could be better for the city if they manned up and flat out rebutted a different plan asking for more money from the Rays towards the stadium.

I think it needs to be handled more as a negotiation but we have a bunch of rubes in city council that wouldn't know how to negotiate their way out of a paper bag.

[Rays Mike]

Physically:

Can I ask why?

[Richard Pryor]

Rick K-
I thought Tatum O'Neal rocks. I didn't know about Aaron.

[Bill Hornbeck]

If we conclude that we must build a new waterfront stadium, then we should close Albert Whitted airport and build the new waterfront stadium on that land. Very few Pinellas County citizens use this airport. There is enough land there to cover the stadium and parking needs. The location of the stadium there to the south on the Albert Whitted airport location would cause less traffic to the downtown area. It would block less of the current view of the waterfront. Traffic could feed off of the south 475 to this area. There would be no need to build into the bay. Thus, there would be no or less environmental concerns. It may cost less to build there, because you would not need to build in tightly confined area. You may have more pure waterfront view from that area. It would develop the south side of the downtown which needs it more than the downtown. It would not disrupt business downtown.

Yours truly,
Bill Hornbeck

[Ray F]

Great idea Bill. I'm all for it. I think it's actually a fantastic idea. You can put it on the north end of the Airport and it would blend in seamlessly with the original waterfront idea.

Now just get it past Steve Lange and his cronies who shoved Albert Whitted down our throats.

[Rays Mike]

I'm all for looking into it as well.. Would a referendum still be required to convert the land for a stadium? Is there enough land to keep the airport open as well? How much further of a walk is it south from Al Lang??

[Kyle]

Yeah. Great idea. And move the water treatment plant to the area that Al Lang sits on now.

[Paul]

This just in: No New Stadium ~!

now return to your pointless discussion over parking cause it ain't getting built on the waterfront.

[Jimbo]

And the self-proclaimed "hate sports-watch, love sports-doing" Paul strikes again. If you have nothing intelligent to add, say nothing at all.

[Rays Mike]

Paul - Why are YOU against the stadium? Do you live downtown?

[Will Ferrell]

Maybe we can build a parking garage selling cowbells. The more cowbells we sell, the more parking room we'll have. Am I right folks?

Bring on the cowbell.

[Paul]

I am against the stadium because it is completely out of scale with the waterfront.... not 'human scale' by any means. That and the billion or so dollars that us Citizens will have to take the risk on, which creates almost zero decent paying jobs. It is not economically viable for the City, in my opinion, and it is an insult to our waterfront/park system to propose such a monstrosity. Parking may be possible on occasions but it will suck the life out of any and every other event happening at the same time. Downtown is doing quite fine. They got the Trop and all that land around it with lots and lots and tons of vacant land available nearby, so make it work there.

[Paul]

and no, i don't live downtown but i do work there.. i live 1 mile north/west of downtown and own property within a few blocks of the Trop.

[Ray F]

i say we stop bickering and arguing, because if I know government as well as I think I know it... this will get on the ballot and it's going to go to a vote anyway.

all the council members are going to just push themselves away from this issue right, wrong, or indifferent.

that being said... Will you know what to do here.

[Rays Mike]

What does that mean, not in scale with the waterfront? How will the stadium impact the waterfront parks from north of Straub Park to the yacht club - The park of the park system that is actually a PARK? I walked around that "waterfront park" you call Al Lang the other day, and I saw a big parking lot, and an empty stadium - and nobody within sight..

I guess by your arithmetic none of the construction jobs created over the next 5 - 8 years by the stadium and Trop redevelopment will be "decent paying jobs?" Pretty elitist statement, if you ask me... And you are completely dismissing the property tax that will be created by the Trop redevelopment? Because the recession that we are in will last forever, and the real estate market will never rebound, right?

[Rays Mike]

BTW: My wife is from SF, and the property value of her loft, which is 3 blocks from AT&T Park, has risen 300% since she bought it - before the park was built.. That means more property tax for the city, and more personal wealth for her....

[Thomas]

Mike,

Attributing that increase to AT&T Park is kind of funny. My job requires me to spend a decent amount of time in SF.

The stadium had almost nothing to do with the increase in value of the King Street Corridor. The values didn't rocket up until UCSF built their new Mission Bay Complex and the T-Third subway line was added.

In fact, the SoMa neighborhood just three blocks the other way from AT&T is still a ghost town of abandoned warehouses and lofts.

[Rick K]

Mike, you have to use special "Thomas Math"

It works like this.....

Florida hotels and owners of short term rental residences reported a particular number of bookings caused by the Super Bowl in Tampa.

Airlines report specific numbers of bookings related to the Super Bowl in Tampa.

Rental Car companies report a specific number of bookings related to the Super Bowl in Tampa.

Limousine companies and Cab services report a particular increase in sales during the 15 day Super Bowl window, compared to the previous year.

Also, there was a measurable increase in taxable retail sales transactions in Pinellas and Hillsborough counties for the same 15 day period, relative to the Super Bowl window the year before.

Add all that up.

Now, if you are Thomas, simply say, "NONE of those dollars can be attributed to the Super Bowl. My job requires me to spend a decent amount of time near Raymond James Stadium. Therefore, ergo, NONE of the dollars that were in Tampa only because of the Super Bowl may be attributed to the Super Bowl."

(and you can do the same thing for any math equation, just assume away reality, and you arrive at Thomas Math)

[atrulyconcernedcitizen]

I find the San Francisco talk entertaining having visited there a couple of years ago. What a gorgeous city. And do we suppose our fellow American's view San Francisco and think of Pac Bell or A.T.&T or whatever the hell they call it now.
How about the Golden Gate Bridge..Cable Cars..Alcatraz...Fisherman's Wharf..Coit Tower..Lombard Street...
I mean really..even Rick K can't believe that people would notice if the Giants left San Francisco.

[Paul]

Rays Mike, it seems you may not be aware of many items I'm referring to with my comment about 'human scale'. There has been alot of work done by the local community to save the waterfront park system and yes, keep it open for all to use... if you look at suggestion of Karl Nurse for the addition of a 2nd item on the referendum you may see what I'm getting at.

Great for your wife and her gains on her property in SF. This ain't SF, just try to get a decent job here... and you'll quickly see. We can't sustain the property values we have now, with jobs that will support the cost of living here, so no thanks to cranking up the values/taxes even more.

And for my comment on decent jobs, I was referring to after the projects were all done. The construction jobs will be temporary and I'm guessing they'll all be out of town guys working it anyhow. Decent jobs are high tech, highly skilled jobs in my mind. I mean you want to crank up the property values and not have jobs to pay for them?

[Ray F]

Soooo...

are the huge 30 story condo towers going up human scale?

[get-smart]

It ain't gonna happen. The neighborhoods will come out in force and vote and kill it all. We will take back our city from these NY criminals and their Brown Shirt allies in City Hall.

Unfortunate for us, there are no other cities that will be sucker enough to give these leaches a half a billion dollars. So we are stuck with them.

We Will Control the Vertical. We Will Control the Horizontal. We Will Take You from a Soft Blur to a Sharp Focus. We are in Control ...We are the PEOPLE!!!

Long Live the Internet!

[Paul]

Ray... there is a master zoning plan for our City. The 30 story condos are allowed in specific areas only. That would be the purple zones on the zoning map, where they are allowed. The zones scale down, by number of stories and density going out towards the neighborhood. This is ideally so a massive condo or high density building is not right next to some little tiny house. Its a good idea.

The waterfront is a low density zoning, actually I believe its zoned as parkland (don't know the official terms). The waterfront is meant to be small in scale so everyone and anyone can make easy use of it. Putting a mega stadium right on the waterfront, interrupts the flow/scale. If there were no zoning like this, a person mentioned that our waterfront would be all massive structures and perhaps look like the condo canyon over on Sand Key.

It sounds like you have a lot of valid questions. You may want to look at the City website and read some history of the park system, the city's visioning 2010, and look at the zoning map. Could be of interest to you.

[Thomas]

Rick,

You can keep posting the insults, I don't care.

I have the fact:

Sales in Hillsborough County for January 2001 were about $1.44 billion, compared to $1.4 billion for January 2000.

That is no more than is seen in any year-to-year comparisons. In fact, Jan 2001 was less than the average growth, and far less than what you're claming.

Call Hillsborough County or look it up - It's public record.

Then come back and post a correction/retraction/apology - in fact add it to the list of those that you need to post.

[Thomas]

"Also, there was a measurable increase in taxable retail sales transactions ... in Hillsborough counties for the same 15 day period, relative to the Super Bowl window the year before."

No there wasn't. You just made that up.

Check the record. The increase was actually less than average year-to-year.

Dude, you're a fraud.

Post a retraction/correction right now!

[Don Mott]

Rick, Is there anything you don't know related to ALL of the businesses in Tampa Bay? Is there anything you don't know about Tampa and St. Pete city finances? You are a fraud. You opined that all of the links I posted here were just opinions and were not peer reviewed. I countered with some links to peer reviewed opinions and you disappeared for a while to let the heat die down. You never ONCE commented on those articles. You are a JOKE!

[crotchety detector]

Don, your slipping calling Rick a joke he's pretty cordial to you all.

At least he lives and grew up in St. Pete.

[Thomas]

Ok, Fraud Rick's disappearing act not withstanding, it's time for the AL East Roundup:

TB @ BOS

Game two of the series for first place in the AL East. Carl Crawford returns to the starting lineup tonight, but now the Rays will play without Carols Pena. Truly unfortunate timing for Pena, who looked like he was ready to bust out of his slow start. Carols had a three game hitting streak and had posted 4 RBIs in those games. He was placed on the 15-day DL.
Taking the mound for Tampa Bay will be Edwin Jackson. Jackson is looking to rebound from a tough outing against the other Sox last week. It will be Edwin's third start against Boston, which included a gem at the Trop. Sadly, Jackson's career ERA at Fenway is an eye popping 8.47 - which means the Rays will need to bring the bats tonight.
Trying to slow down the Ray offense will be Josh Beckett. It's the Rays third look at the 2003 World Series MVP and they've split the first two against the big righty. The Sox will be without David Ortiz again and pre-game line up cards suggest that free agent bust and malcontent J.D. Drew will be hitting third.
At stake - first place in the division. ESPN has the coverage.

TOR @ NY

The Jays have won 7 of 10 and have quietly pulled to within four of the division lead. The Yankees $200M payroll will try to defeat Pinellas Park product Jessie Listch tonight. Jessie is 7-1 on the year and hasnt allowed a run in his last 16 innings. Tonight the kid takes the big stage in the Bronx to battle the Bombers.

Also, Baltimore is probably playing somewhere. I cannot confirm that though.

[Dons Poll]

Don, have you taken any poll of signs among your fellow Largo residents.

Not too many signs right. Probably because they don't care about what best for St. Pete's future either. What do you care if hotel usage or other jobs go away. You know the Rays themselves employ a ton of people. Oh but they live in Largo so I guess it's OK that they lose their jobs.

[Jon McPhee]

I do like comments about San Francisco, especially the implication that property values have zoomed right next to the Giants stadium, just because it's there. Like they haven't zoomed everywhere in that almost fully-built-out city, where the run-up has priced people (the non-competitive ones, I guess) right out of San Fran. Like is happening around here. Like, Buffy, where are the maid and gardener going to live? Did I not read that SF real estate generally is off 15-20%, like elsewhere?

The really cool part about the San Francisco ball park is that it was built without any public money. As in, rich risk capitalists who actually used over $330 million of their very own money to build it on what you might call "distressed" land, without crying that they just can't stay around if they don't get a big freebie from the taxpayers in the area, just to keep the already very profitable franchise even deeper in the black.

And in this time where Bud Selig says every community "owes" the MLB team in its area a vast sum in tribute, this most recent stadium, started in 1996 and finished in 2000, did not somehow involve tax money or municipally-borrowed money to be paid out of future taxes or any of the other scams that MLB and the various owners have pulled off.

For accuracy's sake, I do believe the community put up some $80 million in transit improvements, like extending the rail and bus lines that serve that other City by the Bay so well into the old working-waterfront area where the stadium is built. And the City deferred or maybe gave over $10 million in sales taxes.

I can hardly wait to hear what Rick has to say about the differences between the two stadium projects, and how we are all stupid and dumb because we are not groveling and pleading with the Rays owners, those carpetbaggers who came down from the north to interfere with our local politics and economy to please, please don't take your bat and ball and go home.

And to Don's Poll, what a wonderful non-sequitur. Many pro-subsidy bloggers have consigned Largo and Safety Harbor and Dunedin and even Pinellas Park to the dungheap of Green-Benchland. What "ton" of people do the Rays owners employ? And just how does it work that these people will lose their jobs here? Maybe if the Rays owners default on their lease and their promised commitment to stay? Because some awful noncompetitive losers don't want to gift them with a platinum toy box?

Isn't it great that we have people to demean and hate via this wonderful new medium called Blogspace?

[Jimbo]

If the Rays build it like the Giants built theirs in San Fran, Jon, they would be the owners. It'd be like asking your landlord to build you a new house (that old cliché again), then having him say, "OK, here's a plot of land, you pay for it all, but I own it, so I will hold a lease." After you dumped all that money into it, you're told you can (theoretically) be evicted at any time. What incentive would that be?

"OK", you say, "so the Rays can own it; they built it after all." Fair enough, but now you opened up a whole new saga; right now, we're talking about building a public stadium on public land. It just shifted to a private stadium on public land. Even a supporter like me can't stomach that. They can say what goes on in 'their' stadium, even if it's on publicly-held land, and that's not right.

So, the "pay for it themselves" argument hasn't, nor will it, fly.

[Matthew]

Letters of interest? This is not something we taxpayers can vote on. You don't have a parking plan unless you have, engraved in stone, contracts for enough parking places for the people who may - mind you, may - come to games in an un-airconditioned stadium in August.

[Yes, but baseball is an exception, because, uh...]

Jimbo, they could buy their own land and build their own stadium upon it. That's what any other business has to do.

[get-smart]

Jimbo - If you are the sharpest pencil in the box, the pro side is in deep doodoo.

First, there is No Waterfront Stadium Downtown! Period! Capiche! We are not going to allow these cretins to steal our beautiful waterfront setting. It took a century to perfect. It is the open park system that makes it so ideal. It is for Everyone to enjoy and to give it to these criminals is treason. These people have no respect for anyone or anything.

They can build their own stadium on the Trop site with a land transfer agreement. They would clean it up and build their WonderRaysLand there. They can help develop Central Ave and the surrounding region. They can build their own setting ... Not steal ours!

They would actually be contributing to society. At first it may feel strange to these greedy takers, but they will get used to it... or they can leave .. Ciao!

Stick around Jimbo. We'll put a tip on ya yet!
-

[Tommy Lee]

Dude, I grab a bottle of Effen and the cowbell and i rock that human size park.

[D-Ray Mike]

Which San Francisco did you visit, Thomas??

Our loft is on 2nd Street - in SOMA - exactly in the same "ghost town of abandoned warehouses and lofts" that you claim to know so much about. The value jump occurred before UCSF was even on the drawing boards, and the T-Third line is less than 2 years old..

[D-Ray Mike]

"Carpetbaggers", "thiefs" and "liars." I can read between the lines.. If in the end it is best to move the Rays to Tampa, maybe you rednecks can get that confederate flag on I-75 in return..

[Bobby Fenton]

The guy who made the post suggesting the Albert Whitted site didn't get enough credit. I guess in a way it's pointless to discuss since that's not on the table anyway, but I love how so many people howl about the waterfront when you've got a worthless airport sitting right there so that about 5 people a day can fly their Cessnas in and out. But that's cool, right? As long as heaven forbid you don't put something up that people will actually use ands that you can be proud of and that will keep St. Pete on the map for years to come. I suppose a lot of people don't have that same vision. I live in Tampa, but personally I think St. Pete is crazy for making this as hard as it is. You people should be frothing at the mouth to get this done, especially those of you who claim to be baseball fans.

[Red Sign joke of the country.]

Bobby isn't alone.
The farther St. Pete pushes this away the more stupid small hickville we look to the rest of the country. I had a friend from New York looking at this and the first thing he said is "Your town must hate baseball because the team will be out of there" The next this he said is that the Trop sucks.

Albert Whitted is the perfect place for a new waterfront park and a stadium with a 270 view of the water. You could keep Al Lang and the trop land for whatever. The interstate literally dumps right into it. The idiots save a fenced in private playground for the rich and then say down with rich owners. Hypocritessssssss

Thanks red signs for giving Tampa another reason to make fun of St. Pete.

[Jon McPhee]

A little more on Giants Stadium. What strange ideas you have, Jimbo. What's this about building a house on a lot somebody else owns? The Giants organization apparently leases the stadium on a long term basis from a business entity created just for that project, which likely for tax and other reasons owns the land (not some unfortunate municipality and its taxpayers.)

One of the interesting parallels to the present mess is that the Giants' owners tried to move the team to several other locations, after the citizens of San Francisco voted down a subsidy demand, and the citizens of THOSE communities also declined the bait. So to "avoid the team moving to Florida," this really rich business group bought their OWN land and put up that stadium.

I guess your thinking is based on an assumption that the Rays owners would "build it" on the Al Lang site, not hardly a given, given the present situation here, instead of manning up and finding another location. Also, I thought the Rays were going to actually pay for part of the construction with $150 million of their own money. Whoops, that turns out to be the rent they would otherwise pay to use the stadium that the public actually would have to entirely build.

The more I read, the more I see why not much is being said around here about what the actual real business people in San Francisco ultimately did to deal with the MLB owners' threats to "move the team," and what San Francisco voters did TWICE, rejecting demands for a publicly subsidized stadium, and what the voters of Santa Clara and San Jose said to the Giants owners (also "no thanks").

The only stuff you hear from pro-subsidy types about Giants Park is what a great modern place it is to play baseball. Forget about all that other stuff, and pay no attention to that Kalt guy behind the curtain.

And of course, around here the only people who put a house on land owned by somebody else are the poor saps who hoped to retire peacefully in a double-wide in one of the formerly many trailer parks that now mostly are in the throes of condom-ization, with a couple of thou to the house-owner as a sop. All part of the great scam bubble of go-go competitive speculator people in Land Rovers who bid up housing out of all relationship to human scale.

[Kyle]

Red Sign- You mean "out of there"? Just like the Marlins. I understand.

[get-smart]

This is great. The whole point is to keep the open (underutilized) land open and available for limited use. If it wasn't for the residents fighting to keep the waterfront a public park, the whole of the waterfront would be wall to wall condo and this would not be an issue. It's the juvenile land grab, "it's mine..it's mine" mentality that has brought us to this point. So now you want to destroy the downtown with some idiotic baseball stadium. IF YOU CARE ABOUT THE TEAM; BUILD IT IN TAMPA!!

But no; it would cost the greedy team owners too much to get out of St. Pete. They won't be able to flip it at a profit. If they can find a way of sucking the city into building it on the waterfront, they will be able to flip it before the ink drys on the contract and the city goes bankrupt.

These numbers of a trade off between developments is a sham. The Rays owners are nothing more than a bunch of greedy takers!

Have a nice day! [insert smiley face jpg]
-

[Scott Dennison]

Hey Smart,

If you were so smart, you'd be willing to use your real name. I did. Cause I'm not afraid to make my points with logic and reason; not hatred, emotion and distortion.

You strike me as a lefty, sort of socialist kind of fellow.

Folks like you fight for the freedom of expression until someone else makes a point that you disagree with - then you and others like you want to end all discussion. Worse, its clear you are willing to shout others down and make personal attacks.

Wrong - its totally wrong.

Now as for the issue at hand, my point is simple. And one I've not heard so far. Has government ever ended a tax that was passed previously?

Let's take for example "The Penny for Pinellas"... that was passed as a 10 year, limited use tax. Nearly thirty years later it lives on. And will surely outlive me.

So if the issue is extending the tax payments currently used to pay for Tropicana Field, so what. Voting this down will not end those tax payments by residents of the city. Ending the tourist tax payment that helps pay for the Trop will not end the collection of the tourist tax.

What is true however is that should this fail to pass - the Rays owners (HOw on earth can anyone call them greedy leeches after all they have done in the last three years, anyway?) will find a way to get a stadium done somewhere. They will because the economics of the sport dictate that they have enough revenue to compete. If Sternberg and Co are anything, they are willing to compete.

Whether that be in St Pete, Tampa, Orlando or Oklahoma, they will get a new stadium somewhere. Count on it.

Building it here means that the city/county/state get the tax revenues generated from the current Trop site, which will be considerable.

I will say though that the idea to build the stadium on the AW Airfield is a very interesting idea, and one that I could easily support...

What say you, Red-signer's? How about you "not so"smart?

[Paul]

I don't think anything can be done with Albert Whitted... I believe its because the FAA (federal aviation administration) gave them a ton of money for runway lights or something... and that commits the airport to being there for another 30 years. Again, I'm pretty sure about this but may be incorrect. I for one, love the airport. Its the birthplace of commercial aviation and once you get rid of it, you can never get it back.

I'm humored at the cracks from the Tampa people. We are not in competition with other cities. You got your stuff, we got ours. You don't like it in St Pete, fine. You want to come to the beache, come on over, we'll save a spot for you :) No class envy going on here, most of us are pretty laid back and happy.